Public sector IR35 consultation launched

[Hobosapien]

If I'm working as staff, I want sick pay, holidays, representation, any other staff perks associated with the job.

That naivety (as HMRC see it) is the penalty for not being an employee in the first place, but trying to be dirty tax avoiders that in their new dictionary is a page closer to tax evasion and must be clamped down on due to 'fairness'.

My plan B is to start a new agency called Starbuck's Vodafone so no tax is due at all, it's all voluntary.

[missinggreenfields]

You are working as if on the staff of that public sector agency... How do you think HMRC see it....

Someone from PRISM mentioned that contractors have expenses. You said that you don't if you are inside IR35.

Were you just saying what HMRC think? I'm utterly confused why anyone would think that you don't have expenses if you are inside IR35, which is how I read your post.

[malvolio]

Someone from PRISM mentioned that contractors have expenses. You said that you don't if you are inside IR35.

Were you just saying what HMRC think? I'm utterly confused why anyone would think that you don't have expenses if you are inside IR35, which is how I read your post.

You don't. Latest bright idea from our friends at HMRC is that if YourCo is working under IR35 you are not entitled to claim home-to-work expenses and subsistence unless you are travelling to a site other than your normal place of work. Just like employees and umbrella users...

[youngguy]

My concern would be if you currently have a contract and it goes over into the new tax year.. what happens when you take this online tool and you are inside IR35 (which I'm sure it will be set up to ensure that 99% are!). Do they apply retrospective tax collection for the previous months on that contract. Sounds like alll of us should make a run for it before April

So if someone signs a 12 monther in march what happens .....?

[missinggreenfields]

You don't. Latest bright idea from our friends at HMRC is that if YourCo is working under IR35 you are not entitled to claim home-to-work expenses and subsistence unless you are travelling to a site other than your normal place of work. Just like employees and umbrella users...

Home to work I understand. Travel and subsistence I understand.

Every other expense is still incurred, whether inside or outside IR35, and certainly not "bar none-standard circumstances".

[missinggreenfields]

So if someone signs a 12 monther in march what happens .....?

When (if) the new rules come in, then the engager becomes responsible for assessment and (if necessary) tax deduction from that point forwards.

[northernladuk]

So if someone signs a 12 monther in march what happens .....?

You'd expect the changes would be applied on the first day of the new tax year as T&S was. This doesn't really have anything to do with the actual contract.

[gables]

Home to work I understand. Travel and subsistence I understand.

Every other expense is still incurred, whether inside or outside IR35, and certainly not "bar none-standard circumstances".

Is it possible the use of the word 'expenses' is being misinterpreted as it feels fit? Obviously whether the contract is IR35 caught or not the LTD will have certain costs, expenses if you like, and these should be deducted from income as a cost before CT, deemed taxes are applied. I'm not sure if these are suppose to be covered under the 5% expenses rule, but that doesn't make sense as a low income contract will have the same admin as a higher one.

For a lot of people the term expenses is used to describe personal payments being claimed back from their employer\company to reimburse cost due carrying out their work.

HMRC seem particularly good at mixing up and using terms without clarification.

[DotasScandal]

If everyone presented with such a new contract just walks, that may be the right kind of feedback that will make the govermin change their minds for next April.

You mean contractors actually acting with esprit de corps? Not in this lifetime.

[DotasScandal]

HMRC seem particularly good at mixing up and using terms without clarification.

Yes, and it's completely intentional and aimed squarely at leaving the door wide open to retrospective redefinition ("clarification") of said terms as and when HMRC see fit.
This is a trend that had been in existence for a good few years.